It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

How do you steer a hurricane? CHEMTRAILS!

page: 19
27
<< 16  17  18    20  21 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 4 2010 @ 11:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Slippery Jim
 

So you are admitting that all you want to do is argue, make fun ridicule.
You have no respect for the opinion of others.
As long as we understand each other.




posted on Sep, 4 2010 @ 11:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Gmoneycricket
 


Yes, and here is a quote by them in their own thread,


Can I also point out that "Freedom Of Speech" seems to be a very underused tenent on this very forum which claims to shout it from the rafters.


I guess their idea of "Freedom Of Speech" is only for the few



posted on Sep, 4 2010 @ 11:36 PM
link   
reply to post by CynicalM
 


Yeah it is funny in the old days you could lay on your back, look at the clouds go oh look that one looks like a bunny and everyone would giggle.
But now days you look up go oh that cloud looks man made and the wrath of ridicule comes down on you.
So they must be feeling a little guilty about something.



[edit on 4-9-2010 by Gmoneycricket]



posted on Sep, 4 2010 @ 11:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Gmoneycricket
 


Yeah, like I have said I'm on the fence about chemtrails..

I'm smart enough to know there would be far more effective ways of poisoning the pop, such as the water supply..

But for something that is supposed to be total BS its amazing how the same members jump into every thread regarding the subject...

Kinda makes you think there maybe more to it..



posted on Sep, 4 2010 @ 11:43 PM
link   
reply to post by CynicalM
 


As I said earlier
I do not believe in the use of Chem-trails
But My Government does!
Nite



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 01:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Slippery Jim
So, cars leave contrails behind them? I'd like to see those pictures.


In really cold weather, cars do leave contrails behind them...

contrailscience.com...



Contrails form when the water in engine exhaust mixes with cold moist air and freezes. Normally you see this at 30,000 feet with jet engine exhaust. But in some parts of the world, these conditions can be found at ground level. Here’s a car leaving a contrail in Whitehorse, Canada.




Now here is a helicopter leaving a contrail as it lifts off:




Taken in Russia, where there are many places the temperature drops below -40 degrees. Note this is a helicopter, not normally something you’d see leaving a contrail as they don’t go high enough. But when contrail conditions go all the way to the ground, then pretty much anything can leave a contrail


Here is a video of a LC-130 making a low level contrail shortly after taking off in the South Pole:

After 0:20



I thought this was cool... P-51 Mustangs making contrails;



LOOK! CONTRAILS FROM YOUR MOUTH!

www.sciencebits.com...



 


You people have never heard of condensation before or what?!





[edit on 5-9-2010 by illumin8ed]

[edit on 5-9-2010 by illumin8ed]



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 06:34 AM
link   
Why is it that when you mention 'Chemtrails', its like a taboo word that's not supposed to be discussed by anyone, other than the de-bunkers to claim that they don't exist and anyone that believes in them is a 'loon' or a nutcase?

Weather modification has been happening for years it's a 'fact', and the argument against contrails and chemtrails is still the order of the day. As the above poster states, heat in cold weather produces contrails, maybe some contrails are just that. I don't live directly under a flight path, and do I know the difference between 1,000 ft and 20,000ft? I'd like to think so. Are some of the trails that criss cross over my house on a regular basis from passenger jets at 20,000ft? No. I've flown on planes, these trails are no way near that height, sorry to disappoint the debunkers out there.

I also don't take kindly to the poster from way back who commented on people that look into the chemtrail theory a 'lazy', far from it. I've spent, hours, days, weeks, looking into this phenomenon, and I'm still looking into it, I'd say the lazy way out is to dismiss every trail that's seen in the sky as a 'contrail', anyone can say that.

And what makes the debunkers think that everyone that's looking into the chemtrail theory, thinks that we're being poisoned on a mass scale? That's a damning theory (though history proves that it has been used in the past) The earths magnetosphere is damaged, has been for years. What happens when you have a barium meal in a hospital? It blocks out harmful gamma rays when you have an x-ray right? Just a thought.

People need to stop blasting this subject as 'nonsense'. The OP had a theory and seeing as this is a conspiracy forum, he's got a right to air that theory, shame it can't be discussed in a more mature and adult fashion by some, bloody silly as soon as the word 'chemtrails' used and all of the usual 'experts' and debunkers jump on board to toss it out of the forum as bunkem. If it was bunkem, then would you see links like this floating about the web?

Thanks for the thread anyway Boondock mate


patft.uspto.gov... .&OS=PN/4686605&RS=PN/4686605

frwebgate.access.gpo.gov...:s517is.txt.pdf

www.thenakedscientists.com...

webfairy.org...

www.crossroad.to...



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 06:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gmoneycricket
Any Idiot knows the engine takes water vapor in with the air and kicks it out the exhaust!
It is called humidity!
The higher the humidity the more water out the exhaust.


You are absolutely correct that an idiot knows that. An educated person knows that the water emitted from a combustion engine is a normal byproduct of burning hydrocarbon chain fuel in atmospheric oxygen. If you burn gasoline or keropsene in zero humidity air, like at 50,000 feet, you get water and carbon dioxide as products. Chemically, it is CxHx + O2 ->H2O +CO2. Since there is nitrogen in the atmosphere and sulphur contaminants in the fuel you also get some NOx and SOx It is way to early in the morning to work out the stoichiometry.



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 07:03 AM
link   
reply to post by 4nsicphd
 


The poster was talking about "car" engines so zero humidity at 50,000' is slightly irrelevant...But then many contrails (like the pics in this thread) are below the "clouds"..
Last I heard clouds posses a level of humidity



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 07:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by smash_the_system


I also don't take kindly to the poster from way back who commented on people that look into the chemtrail theory a 'lazy', far from it. I've spent, hours, days, weeks, looking into this phenomenon, and I'm still looking into it, I'd say the lazy way out is to dismiss every trail that's seen in the sky as a 'contrail', anyone can say that.

What happens when you have a barium meal in a hospital? It blocks out harmful gamma rays when you have an x-ray right? Just a thought.









The chemtrailers just make it so easy. What, is your doctor using a supernova as an X-ray machine. X-rays are not, thank roentgen, gamma rays. They are much longer in wavelength, being in the frequency range of 30 petahertz to 30 exahertz. A better, and more accurate, distinction between the 2 is the source. Wait, I forgot for a moment that I'm discussing this with a chemtrailer. Do your own research, for 7 or 8 years of full time study, and learn that x-rays come from electrons outside the nucleus while gamme rays, which would not be blocked by a little barium powder, come from a radioactive nucleus.
OK, now that we've discovered the efficacy of your science background, tell us more scientific stuff about chemtrails.



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 07:30 AM
link   
reply to post by 4nsicphd
 


Of course gamma rays will not be stopped by a little barium or lead etc,
but why would you want to stop all gamma rays anyway???

Do you want a new iceage?

An the other hand, if you wanted to slow the warming then it is a different scenario...



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 08:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by CynicalM
reply to post by 4nsicphd
 


Of course gamma rays will not be stopped by a little barium or lead etc,
but why would you want to stop all gamma rays anyway???

Do you want a new iceage?

An the other hand, if you wanted to slow the warming then it is a different scenario...

Actually, only ultra-relativistic gamma rays affect condensation nucleation and, therefore, climate change. The data about a global warming/gamma ray correlation are ambivalent. See physicsworld.com... and in particular the Sloan and Wolfendale paper cited there.



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 08:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by smash_the_system
Why is it that when you mention 'Chemtrails', its like a taboo word that's not supposed to be discussed by anyone, other than the de-bunkers to claim that they don't exist and anyone that believes in them is a 'loon' or a nutcase?


..because "chemtrails" are one of the most illogical and impractical conspiracy theories ever.


Originally posted by smash_the_system
Weather modification has been happening for years it's a 'fact', and the argument against contrails and chemtrails is still the order of the day.


I don't disagree that weather modification tests have been done. But wide spread poisoning of the population via jets? That's just stupid.


Originally posted by smash_the_system
As the above poster states, heat in cold weather produces contrails, maybe some contrails are just that.


All contrails are just that. Condensed water vapor... most of it turns to microscopic ice particles.

CON-trail.... CON = Condensation


Originally posted by smash_the_system
I don't live directly under a flight path, and do I know the difference between 1,000 ft and 20,000ft? I'd like to think so.


I live directly under flight paths for one of the biggest airports ever. Los Angeles International Airport. I'd like to think I know the difference between 1000 and 20000 feet to... but that is because I used to measure objects for a living.


Originally posted by smash_the_system
Are some of the trails that criss cross over my house on a regular basis from passenger jets at 20,000ft? No. I've flown on planes, these trails are no way near that height, sorry to disappoint the debunkers out there.


Sorry to disappoint you... but passenger jets are not the only aircraft that can make contrails, AND, the only reason common contrails appear at 20k feet is because it is normally -40 degrees that high. It is possible to be -40 degrees at lower altitudes. In some places like North Dakota, it gets -60 all the way to the ground.

Failure...


Originally posted by smash_the_system
And what makes the debunkers think that everyone that's looking into the chemtrail theory, thinks that we're being poisoned on a mass scale? That's a damning theory (though history proves that it has been used in the past)


Read my first post on this topic. You must define what a "chemtrail" is before you try to prove or disprove it. If you don't, all you are doing is moving the goal post.

The common understanding is that "chemtrails" are a conspiracy against the population, and or Earth... something nefarious. That is why "debunkers" think the way they do.

The pesticides sprayed from crop duster aircraft can be considered "chemtrails", but it's not nefarious. Are you going to use that to support your theories? I hope not...

Please define what type of "chemtrails" you are talking about before you continue.


Originally posted by smash_the_system
What happens when you have a barium meal in a hospital? It blocks out harmful gamma rays when you have an x-ray right? Just a thought.


Wrong..


Gamma rays don't come from x-ray machines. You got your "Google Knowledge" all wrong.

The decay of Barium-133 (isotope) produces gamma-rays, and is used to calibrate gamma-ray detectors.

Barium Sulfate is what is used in "Barium Meals", which shows up on x-ray machines because it blocks x-rays.

Try again....

[edit on 5-9-2010 by illumin8ed]



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 08:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by smash_the_system
People need to stop blasting this subject as 'nonsense'. The OP had a theory and seeing as this is a conspiracy forum, he's got a right to air that theory, shame it can't be discussed in a more mature and adult fashion by some, bloody silly as soon as the word 'chemtrails' used and all of the usual 'experts' and debunkers jump on board to toss it out of the forum as bunkem.


This subject is nonsense. The OP's theory has been tested and found to be impractical and impossible.

Adults have discussed it... I already gave the OP the benefit of the doubt and tried to find support for his theory, but there is none. The only support there is, is wild, impractical, impossible theories. I even tried to create my own theories of how it would work, and none of them would work, there just isn't enough chemical to be sprayed, and it would have almost zero effect on the hurricane.

You can spray all the crap you want in the air near a type 4 hurricane, and the hurricane will suck it up and throw it back at you.



[edit on 5-9-2010 by illumin8ed]

[edit on 5-9-2010 by illumin8ed]

[edit on 5-9-2010 by illumin8ed]



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 09:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by CynicalM
reply to post by 4nsicphd
 


The poster was talking about "car" engines so zero humidity at 50,000' is slightly irrelevant...But then many contrails (like the pics in this thread) are below the "clouds"..
Last I heard clouds posses a level of humidity

Don't conflate "wet" with "humid". Humidity is a relative measurement, usually expressed in percentage, of the amount of water vapor in the air. A cloud forms when water vapor phase changes to water droplets, or in the case of cirrus clouds, to ice crystals, or, much more rarely, supercooled water droplets. Since cirrus can often be found as high as 40,000', sometimes contrails will be beneath, particularly with civil airline passenger aircraft, which, for pressurization reasons, are almost always, in the U S, beneath 40,000.Military aircraft can go higher, and some personal jets will be found higher. My company's Gulfstream is certified to 51,000', but the environment is so hostile there and there is rarely any real benefit to going that high, we don't use that capability with passengers. We, as crewmembers wear 'quick-don oxygen masks but passengers don't, and at 51,000', useful consciousness is so short (about 5 seconds factoring in the "startle factor"), they'd never get a mask on and even if they did, the passenger masks are demand type and have diluters. Crew masks have an emergency 100% switch that 'pushes' the flow a little.
So, yes, sometimes a contrail is below some clouds. All it takes for a contrail is the combustion of a hydrocarbon in oxygen at a temperature cold enough to quickly freeze.



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 09:55 AM
link   
Wouldn't have thought any different from the replies really. Dare to enter a thread on the 'silly' chemtrail theory and get ready for the slaughter eh?


In reply to the 'experts', I didn't profess to be an 'expert' with my last post. I'm merely looking and researching as most that come here tend to do. I'm no scientist, pilot, weatherman etc, just someone with an interest to what's happening with the weather and what's happening in the skies lately, it isn't hard to see


I didn't say that the skies are being polluted for a mass cull agenda I don't think? Have some forgotten that the earth is supposedly 'heating up'? Global Warming anyone?

Is is possible to move a hurricane? Is it possible to strengthen or weaken a hurricane? Do we have the 'technology' to do that? From what I've found so far, that's verging on a big 10/4.

Instead of saying Chemtrail=Myth, prove it. What gives anyone the right to say that my thinking is 'way off', just because it doesn't fit in to the debunkers agenda.

I'm 5ft 7" tall, my house is about 40ft high, just because I haven't used 'measurements' in a past career doesn't make me so dumb not to have a rough idea how far things may seem or be above me.

What plane flies over populated areas at about 5,000ft (below low cloud formation) and leaves pretty X's in the sky? Please, I'm still intrigued.

Until then, call me 'thick', 'devoid' of knowledge a 'tin foil hatter', whatever, but until then, the debunkers can have their theories, and I can have mine.

Carry on as you will.



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 09:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by smash_the_system
The OP had a theory and seeing as this is a conspiracy forum, he's got a right to air that theory, shame it can't be discussed in a more mature and adult fashion by some


That's the problem. The OP had an idea - and rightly posted it in skunkworks - but neither he nor anyone else has been able to suggest any possible way in which in the idea might work.

How do con(chem)trials steer hurricanes?

This thread has gone offf topic in all manner of directions, but has not addressed the purpose of the thread.

It doesn't matter if a contrail seen in Arizona is a contrail or a chemtrail or cloud seeding or chaff .... unless it is being used to steer a hurricane.

Unless someone can show how hurricanes are steered then the thread is a pointless hoax.



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by smash_the_system

. I'm no scientist, pilot, weatherman etc, just someone with an interest to what's happening with the weather and what's happening in the skies lately, it isn't hard to see




just because I haven't used 'measurements' in a past career doesn't make me so dumb not to have a rough idea how far things may seem or be above me.

What plane flies over populated areas at about 5,000ft (below low cloud formation) and leaves pretty X's in the sky? Please, I'm still intrigued.

U
Carry on as you will.


Maybe this will help you and others in your research. I am both a pilot (airline transport with jet type ratings and FAA letters of competency in various aircraft, mostly warbirds such as the B-26, B-17, Mig 15, 17 and 19 and Vodochody L-39 Albatross) and a scientist (MS in Chemistry (Forensic track), MS in Physics, and PhD in Physics. One of my jobs now is as Forensics Director of a firm doing forensic investigations of aircraft accidents.
One of the lessons I've learned is that visual observation has limits. Witnesses make claims, which they truly believe, that are simply wrong at worst and unreliable at best. The problem lies in the physical limitations of our sense of sight, particularly depth perception. We rely on stereopsisis for depth perception. That is the horizontal angular disparity of two points, say the wingtips of an aircraft. A Boeing 737 (800 model) has a wingspan of 112'7" OK, time to brush off the ancient trigonometry texts and your sine table. The wingtips of a 737 directly overhead at 35,000 feet subtends an angle of .36 degrees. At 5,000' it is 2.56 degrees. The human eye/brain is simply not designed to disciminate between such small angles. Blame evolution. Being able to see the sabretooth at 3 miles simply gave no evolutionary advantage. In fact, a study I use often in court cases says this."Gregory (1966, p. 53) has stated that we are “effectively one-eyed for distances greater than about twenty feet” (approximately 6m). Now, if both aircraft are overhead at the same time we do better. Howard (1919) showed that good stereoscopic observers are capable of detecting depth differences corresponding to binocular disparities of only a few seconds of arc. Of course, Howard's observers didn't have 737s to look at. So you have to take that with a grain of salt, which at 1 foot distance subtends an angle of .04 degrees. For your research, take a look at www.journalofvision.org...
Now, as far as a jet at 5,000 feet making x's in the sky, by the time a jet gets to 5,000 feet it should be established on the radio beam called a localizer, which is a straight line from something called the outer marker to the runway touchdown point. A novice might make some S turns trying to track the localizer but that's it. For a typical flight path of a jet down low, you can look at the following, which happens to be for ruway 13L at Kennedy 204.108.4.16...
A lot of the "debunkers" are really not trying to be condescendingly disparaging. We just happen to have specialized knowledge, education, training and experience to know that some claims just are wrong. And others are so bad that they don't even rise to the level of wrong.
I hope you take this in the spirit it's offered.

Jet jock doc



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 02:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Essan
but neither he nor anyone else has been able to suggest any possible way in which in the idea might work.

that is a fabrication (lie),
if you had of read the entire thread
instead of popping your butt in here
on page 14, you would have seen
it already. I won't repeat it again
cuz I'm pretty sure there will be another
lazy poster who pops in on page 19
or after and projects the same
disinfo that you are doing.
If you're gonna comment on a thread
the very least you could do is
actually read the darn thing before
you post on it.



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 03:40 PM
link   
reply to post by boondock-saint
 


Boondock, I have been active in this thread since page 1 and have seen no theories on how to steer a hurricane with chemtrails. I have seen some entirely impractical ideas on how to affect the intensity (30,000 747s loaded with carbon black, for instance) but nothing relating to the threads title of "How do you steer a hurricane? CHEMTRAILS" (Caps in the original.)



new topics

top topics



 
27
<< 16  17  18    20  21 >>

log in

join